BBC Article: "9/11 Third Tower Mystery 'Solved'"

Here's a new article by Mike Rudin, that's been posted on the BBC News website. It mentions that NIST says "fire fighters could not fight the fires in Tower 7, because they didn't have enough water and focused on saving lives." However, NIST's claim is incorrect. There were in fact fireboats that had been moored near the WTC the morning of 9/11, to provide water to the site. See:http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/17_Pharvey.html

One of the boats, the John J. Harvey, could reportedly "pump 16,000 to 20,000 gallons of water a minute. 'That's the equivalent of 15 [fire] engines drafting water,' explained 65-year-old FDNY retiree Bob Lenney, who spent 25 years piloting Harvey." See:http://www.fireboat.org/press/time_out_092701.asp

In fact, one of NIST's earlier reports stated, "According to the FDNY first-person interviews, water was never an issue at WTC 7 since firefighting was never started in the building." See:http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-8.pdf (p. 110).

9/11 third tower mystery 'solved'

By Mike Rudin
BBC, Conspiracy Files

The final mystery of 9/11 will soon be solved, according to US experts investigating the collapse of the third tower at the World Trade Center.

The 47-storey third tower, known as Tower Seven, collapsed seven hours after the twin towers.

Investigators are expected to say ordinary fires on several different floors caused the collapse.

Conspiracy theorists have argued that the third tower was brought down in a controlled demolition.

Unlike the twin towers, Tower Seven was not hit by a plane.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology, based near Washington DC, is expected to conclude in its long-awaited report this month that ordinary fires caused the building to collapse.

That would make it the first and only steel skyscraper in the world to collapse because of fire.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology's lead investigator, Dr Shyam Sunder, spoke to BBC Two's "The Conspiracy Files":

"Our working hypothesis now actually suggests that it was normal building fires that were growing and spreading throughout the multiple floors that may have caused the ultimate collapse of the buildings."

'Smoking gun'

However, a group of architects, engineers and scientists say the official explanation that fires caused the collapse is impossible. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth argue there must have been a controlled demolition.

The founder of the group, Richard Gage, says the collapse of the third tower is an obvious example of a controlled demolition using explosives.

"Building Seven is the smoking gun of 9/11… A sixth grader can look at this building falling at virtually freefall speed, symmetrically and smoothly, and see that it is not a natural process.

"Buildings that fall in natural processes fall to the path of least resistance", says Gage, "they don't go straight down through themselves."

Conspiracy theories

There are a number of facts that have encouraged conspiracy theories about Tower Seven.

Although its collapse potentially made architectural history, all of the thousands of tonnes of steel from the skyscraper were taken away to be melted down.

The third tower was occupied by the Secret Service, the CIA, the Department of Defence and the Office of Emergency Management, which would co-ordinate any response to a disaster or a terrorist attack.

The destruction of the third tower was never mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report. The first official inquiry into Tower Seven by the Federal Emergency Management Agency was unable to be definitive about what caused its collapse.

In May 2002 FEMA concluded that the building collapsed because intense fires had burned for hours, fed by thousands of gallons of diesel stored in the building. But it said this had "only a low probability of occurrence" and more work was needed.

But now nearly seven years after 9/11 the definitive official explanation of what happened to Tower Seven is finally about to be published in America.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology has spent more than two years investigating Tower Seven but lead investigator Dr Shyam Sunder rejects criticism that it has been slow.

"We've been at this for a little over two years and doing a two or two and a half year investigation is not at all unusual. That's the same kind of time frame that takes place when we do aeroplane crash investigations, it takes a few years."

With no steel from Tower 7 to study, investigators have instead made four extremely complex computer models worked out to the finest detail. They're confident their approach can now provide the answers. Dr Sunder says the investigation is moving as fast as possible.

"It's a very complex problem. It requires a level of fidelity in the modelling and rigour in the analysis that has never been done before."

Other skyscrapers haven't fully collapsed before because of fire. But NIST argues that what happened on 9/11 was unique.

Steel structure weakened

It says Tower Seven had an unusual design, built over an electricity substation and a subway; there were many fires that burnt for hours; and crucially, fire fighters could not fight the fires in Tower 7, because they didn't have enough water and focused on saving lives.

Investigators have focused on the east side where the long floor spans were under most stress.

They think fires burnt long enough to weaken and break many of the connections that held the steel structure together.

Most susceptible were the thinner floor beams which required less fireproofing, and the connections between the beams and the columns. As they heated up the connections failed and the beams sagged and failed, investigators say.

The collapse of the first of the Twin Towers does not seem to have caused any serious damage to Tower Seven, but the second collapse of the 1,368ft (417m) North Tower threw debris at Tower Seven, just 350ft (106m) away.

Tower Seven came down at 5.21pm. Until now most of the photographs have been of the three sides of the building that did not show much obvious physical damage. Now new photos of the south side of the building, which crucially faced the North Tower, show that whole side damaged and engulfed in smoke.

I'm still waiting to see a shred of evidence to support this theory. Just "saying" that the building collapsed due to fire is not evidence or proof that it collapsed due to fire. You can bet that NIST won't bother to explain this away:

When the hit piece comes out, this is a critical piece of evidence that NIST (I am assuming) will ignore in their report:

"Although virtually all of the structural steel from the Twin Towers and Building 7 was removed and destroyed, preventing forensic analysis, FEMA's volunteer investigators did manage to perform "limited metallurgical examination" of some of the steel before it was recycled. Their observations, including numerous micrographs, are recorded in Appendix C of the WTC Building Performance Study. Prior to the release of FEMA's report, a fire protection engineer and two science professors published a brief report in JOM disclosing some of this evidence. 1

The results of the examination are striking. They reveal a phenomenon never before observed in building fires: eutectic reactions, which caused "intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese." The New York Times described this as "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation." 2 WPI provides a graphic summary of the phenomenon. A one-inch column has been reduced to half-inch thickness. Its edges--which are curled like a paper scroll--have been thinned to almost razor sharpness. Gaping holes--some larger than a silver dollar--let light shine through a formerly solid steel flange. This Swiss cheese appearance shocked all of the fire-wise professors, who expected to see distortion and bending--but not holes.

FEMA's investigators inferred that a "liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur" formed during a "hot corrosion attack on the steel." The eutectic mixture (having the elements in such proportion as to have the lowest possible melting point) penetrated the steel down grain boundaries, making it "susceptible to erosion." ...The "deep mystery" of the melted steel may be yielding its secrets to investigators not beholden to the federal government. Professor Steven Jones has pointed out that the severe corrosion, intergranular melting, and abundance of sulfur are consistent with the theory of thermite arson. "http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/metallurgy/index.html
_______________Arabesque: 911 Truth

This is posted on the fourth of July! May I be the first to suggest that the BBC is the new King of the empire and revolution is ovedue. I believe that forgiveness is the key to getting past 9/11. However, in this case , I also need to also suggest rebeling against big media tyrants-Ignore them.

Wow - what a great investigation BBC...
But I'm still having a few problems with molten metal in the ruins, free fall collapse speed through undamaged steel structure, and these incompetent moving guys from Urban Moving Systems. Where did this Dominic Suter guy go the second week of September 2001 leaving his customers with all their furniture stranded in their warehouse ?
Why were some arrested dressed up as Arabs with traces of explosives in their van ?http://www.todayscatholicworld.com/mossad-agents-911.htm
Great journalist coup with these 'Conspiracy Files' BBC...
But then again....

Ok then. Since the "final mystery of 9/11" has been "solved", I guess I can finally hang up my hat, and go take part in life again. What a relief. I was sure "the final mystery of 9/11" would never be solved, but I was proven wrong. I'm just thankful that nothing else happened that day that requires "solving." Can you imagine? Whew. I'm guessing 911blogger.com, 911truth.org, truthaction.org, visibility911.com, etc... will be closing down tomorrow? Man, those were good sites. Shame to see them go. It was fun while it lasted. Nice knowing all of you. Take care. Buh bye.

Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

The way that I see corporate media working, especially FAUX NEWS, is that they indeed do their thing to create the "sound bite", or "bumper sticker" few words that are then driven into citizen's minds through their mind-control repetitions. In fact, perhaps this BBC thing is a delivery system of the headline "9/11 Mystery SOLVED"? Perhaps this is bigger goal than the info in film itself...but we havn't seen the film yet, so, who knows.

Anyway, I still perceive the effort by Richard Green of Air America as creating a fabricated "end" to the 9/11 Truth story at the end of his minimalistic month of Thursday night "hours"...aka...minutes on the radio the same way...same with Alten's big push for his fictional book "Shell Game"...same as the "Week or month of 9/11 Truth". Each effort can be looked at as creating the last chapter in the 9/11 Truth story...but not so!

So, when I hear that something about 9/11 is "Solved", and it comes from corporate media, well, I guess that they are still trying to bury us, and that it just proves that we are indeed on the rightt track.

On the good side, that there is another round of 9/11 information surfacing "yet again" so many years after the 9/11 Commission Report was released, it certainly makes the point that the Report and the official story was faulty. This in and of itself now becomes a good talking point for our reach-outs to the public.

And after all, the headline is not too far away from "9/11 Mysteries" is it?

There IS a connection here, and just take a look at one of LA's big banners: "google 9/11 MYSTERIES". The 9/11 Truth virus gets spread all over the world very rapidly, and the BBC would LOVE to get its foot more into the door of US corporate media. So, cannot we argue that the BBC messaging is in response to sofia, the huge bannering, the airplane bannering, and all the other work we are doing?

So, I trust that whatever might be in this new "bracketting" message from the BBC, we will be able to turn it to our favor...AGAIN!

And, although certainly from a subjective point of view, the more CI...Civil Informationing type of work we do, like the above mentioned bannering 10,000 cars over a freeway in three hours and flying half way up and down the east coastline with a huge banner in tow, the more we become our own media...and consequently, the more the corporate media reacts to regain their territory. My view is that there are connections here...

meant to be fed to the masses to make sure they go back to sleep. Wow this is LAME! Who is this demolition expert Mark Loiseaux ? It looks like a Bruce Willis movie to me. And how about Dr. Shyam "the sham " Sunder " that NORMAL building fires spreading thru out the multiple floors that may have caused the ultimate collapse" How can this guyt keep a straight face?

The BBC must really think that most people who are given any explanation with a confident sounding narrator traitor will just accept it ..........the scary part is that they just might. Let's face it the BBC has a vested interest in this hit piece from losing critical "premonition" video footage to making sure no one starts connecting the dots to the 7/7 attacks. Thanks BBC=British Bullshiting Corporation.

The BBC repeat the same approach adopted in the first 'conspiracy files' programme.

There, on the subject of WTC7, they allowed Popular Mechanics to explain the collapse by saying (approximately) "when you know the way the building was constructed, you know that the collapse was normal". There was no challenge, no further push for detail.

It is true "Just because".

In this case, they follow the articulate and precise Richard Gage, by a lazy bumbling rebuttal by 'demolition expert' Mark Loiseaux, who says controlled dem could only happen in a Bruce Willis movie. The BBC just accepts this unquestioningly and asks "So what DID happen?"

That is appalling journalism and I wonder what other circumstances they could get away with that.

I know everyone here probably feels the same way, but I just needed to vent this because the BBC have removed the comments section from the story.

Is the claim "there was no water for fire fighters" the only new? (And if there was not, it would not change what we already of the fires.)

If there had been "intense fires" (which were not visible on smoky southern side windows either),
the building will not get dismantled into little pieces. Fire does not break structure.
Energy needed to all those cuttings of the stucture is much more than the fire and potential gravitational energy can give.

Are they in NST trying to give the old pancake theory here though they rejected it in towers? Pancaking in free fall speed?

They can't give "global collapse then ensued" here. Of course they can, but its refutation will come much more evidently.

Previously on the page of that BBC article they had a response form with the introductory text "Will this news allay conspiracy theories surrounding the third tower? You can send us reaction using the form below."

Below is my response using said form:

##########

Once again the BBC is doing its job: acting in the role of intellectual bodyguards for the mass-murderers in government who stage terrorism in order to obtain more power and control.

First, everyone with an I.Q. high enough to tie their shoes is a conspiracy theorist. The mendacious and disproven official government theory regarding the 9/11 attacks is that of a conspiracy involving 19 hijackers. The editors at the BBC--presumably being experienced in the use of language--already know this of course, which demonstrates that the BBC is acting dishonestly and as a mouthpiece for government criminals' propagandistic tactics by using such hypocritical labels which are intended to posion the well and thereby shut down honest inquiry.

The fact that the three World Trade Center towers were brought down with, e.g., thermite, has been apodictically proven based upon the known laws of physics.

From the color of the yellow-hot molten metal seen in a number of videos cascading off the South Tower, it had to be at least over 1000 °C (as the temperature of an incandescent object is exhibited by its color), yet jet fuel burns in open air at 260-315 °C; nor do burning office, building, or plane materials impart temperatures anywhere near that hot to structural members (indeed, it would present quite a hazard if such articles were constructed with such powerful incendiaries, and so designers of such objects go out of their way to make sure that they are not). Thus, if it wasn't molten iron from thermite that we are seeing come off the South Tower, then by necessity a reaction source with a heat intensity very much like thermite had to be present. Yet there is nothing in the U.S. government's account that can explain such a heat source; indeed, there's nothing innocent that could explain it, since it requires some sort of extremely powerful incendiary.

Moreover, large quantities of reacted and unreacted thermite have been found in the ruins of the World Trade Center, in different samples collected both before and after clean-up operations began. So we know as a matter of empirical scientific fact that large quantities of thermite were used in order to destroy the World Trade Center.

In the following paper it is conclusively proved via chemical analysis using wavelength dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (WDS), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (X-EDS) that large quantities of thermite analogs (such as thermate) were used in the destruction of the World Trade Center towers: "Revisiting 9/11/2001--Applying the Scientific Method," Dr. Steven E. Jones, Journal of 911 Studies, Vol. 11 (May 2007).

See also the following video-recorded presentation on physical remains of thermite (in the form of unreacted flakes of thermite) from the demolished World Trade Center, collected even before clean-up operations began: "Dr. Steven E. Jones Boston 911 Conference 12-15-07 Red chips Thermite.mov," Google Video, December 21, 2007.

So it is simply an irrefragable scientific fact that the U.S. government staged the 9/11 attacks from beginning to end.